Hardware Async compute and DX12/Vulkan are something AMD is trying to push for a long time now. But it cannot afford to splash millions per game like Nvidia does.
Which the later is doing so, to keep the games at DX11 and add gimpworks. Or at least force DX11 support.
Look at some recent ports. All AMD optimizations existing on consoles were stripped from the same titles when came to PC.
That results that you need a pretty beefy hardware to achieve the same visual quality and performance with consoles.
Yet AMD sponsored titles (FC5 for example) work perfectly regardless the hardware either Nvidia or AMD.
Thought there are titles like SW Battlefront 2 who have kept a lot of those optimizations. The Division 1 also. (DX12 on Vega 64 works better than on my old GTX1080Ti Xtreme, DX11 different story)
Have you see how the Battlefront 2 performs on Nvidia cards with DX12 or HDR activated? Very appalling even for the damn Titan Xp, which last year considered over the 1080Ti Xtreme.
A card that costs atm 3 times more than Vega 64, and is fricking slower at 4K HDR + gsync!!!!!
Yet on other games at same settings is barely less than a handful fps faster. And that on a £3400 setup (27" 4k HDR gsync monitor + TXp) compared to a £900 setup (35" 4K HDR Freesync monitor + V64 Red devil)
True not all together at same review, and need to connect the dots from 2 different reviews, but for heaven sake -_-
People should have grab pitchforks against Nvidia long time ago, not blaming AMD for not competing.